Lewis, Wilson & Hicks v. Durham

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• describing the “Royal Oak Line” as “bearing a design of an octagonal shaped bezel with eight hexagonal screw-heads”
• describing the “Royal Oak Line” as “bearing a design of an octagonal shaped bezel with eight hexagonal screw-heads”
• stating despite “high” sales revenues totaling $167 million, the number of units sold in the United States “each year hovers around 3,000”, and that this “low volume favors Defendants”
• rejecting functionality argument because “the trade dress at issue composed of an octagonal bezel with eight flat embedded screws is neither essential to the use or purpose of a watch nor does it affect the cost or quality of the article”
• rejecting functionality argument because “the trade dress at issue composed of an octagonal bezel with eight flat embedded screws is neither essential to the use or purpose of a watch nor does it affect the cost or quality of the article”
• trade dresses similar because “both watches have an octagonal bezel with eight flat screws spaced out around the bezel”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).